What I can't figure out is this....if Democrats really want to comment on the perversity of the President's commitment to the killing, but not the aftermath, why do they not speak about this? The soundbytes might then make their way to the news and force the GOP's hand in addressing the issue. If the roles were reverse, and if this had happened on Clinton's watch, it would be a regular drumbeat in the press.
Yet another reason for me to be disappointed by the Democratic leadership.
Or is that an oxymoron?









Discuss